Mach10:There has never been an economy anywhere at any time that has recovered or improved as a result of austerity.

Right-wingers can knee-jerk all they want about the cost of social assistance, but the reality has been borne out again and again. Put $20 into the pocket of a rich guy, and it goes right to the bank. Put $20 in the pocket of a working-class citizen, and it goes right into the cash register of your local store.

And as much as Chase Manhattan would love you to believe otherwise, it's the general store--not the bank--that forms the basis of a moving economy.

Let me be blunt: Fiscal policy requirements in times of economic crisis are not the same as in prosperity.

This is why the right wing persistently screws up economies the world over again and again: You people just cannot grasp the concept that in times of need, the question "how did we get here" just isn't relevant when the question "how the hell do we get out" is more pressing. The same fiscally conservative policies that may (or may not; that's a subject for legitimate debate) help maintain a healthy economy, but they sure-as-shiat don't help a failing economy. If you sever money flowing into the working class, you lower your expenditures, but since Greece (like most western nations) derive between 60 and 80% of their taxation revenue from people at or below the national wage average, stretching this demographic further means that the 20% savings to your operating budget results in a double to triple loss in your revenue. [Source: OECD]

When the boat is taking on water, everyone should be concerning themselves with rowing and bailing--not pushing sailors overboard. Plenty of time to hang the captain when you get a-shore.

Nationalize the banks if necessary, but Investing this bailout money heavily in infrastructure provides the foundation of a capitalist society with money which will immediately be spent on the service industry. This wealth then subsequently moves up the chain, offering more jobs. The new infrastructure is now an asset which needs to be maintained (costs money) but also generates revenue from more jobs, increased trade, and operational income. This isn't socialism, it's farking common sense--and it worked out just fine in the US c. 1930s

Funneling money into the same broken system on the contingent that they rip out huge chunks of the machinery, and above all on basis that they will be cut off if the broken machinery miraculously refuses to tick over smoothly is a goddamn stupid idea.

Let's make no mistake: Greece is in trouble because their entire economic policy is a shiatty joke of Saturday Night Live caliber. And not a good joke of the 80s/90s. We're talking 'Jimmy-Fallon-Glancing-at-the-Camera-Grinning-Nervously-While-Being-Pa id-To-Sound-Stupid' bad. But fixing this involves making fiscal decisions that give right-wingers indigestion.

You continue to show you know nothing. Amazing. That zero percent interest is on short term debt. Once feds stop priming the bond market and rates go up, interest in debt explodes. Keep continuing to offer awful analysis though. It is amusing.

Thunderpipes:Orgasmatron138: Thunderpipes: Within a decade, we will be in a worse situation than Greece. We can handle a bigger debt ratio, but eventually even the mighty USA cannot handle 200%, 300% debt to GDP.

I know libs don't care, but when Obama says he is saving us a trillion dollars over 10 years, yet still has trillion dollar deficits, we aren't really saving money.

We need a 500 billion dollar surplus a year to even begin to pay down the debt. With each year of trillion dollar deficits, this gets way worse. At the end of his second term, interest payments on the debt alone will be in the 500 billion dollar range. Think about all the dough being thrown away.....

Something drastic needs to happen. The country is bleeding profusely and we just keep putting on band aids and giving transfusions. We need to fix the damage.

We care, that's why we're wiling to pay more taxes.

Anyway, I know oversimplified solutions aren't really the answer, but Warren Buffet made a good point when he talked about fixing the deficit. He said "You just pass a law that says that anytime there's a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election. Yeah. Yeah. Now you've got the incentives in the right place, right?"

Fixing the deficit won't solve the problem overnight, but it will stop the bleeding. That has to be step 1, but even that won't happen until people really put Congress' feet to the fire.

If either party came up with a perfect solution that would magically solve our problems overnight, the other party would still block it because that party wouldn't want the other to be successful. That's the team mentality that our political process is reduced to.

YOU are not willing to pay more taxes. You only want the rich, the business owners to pay those taxes. That is the problem. Buffet is a loon, but I agree with him on the election thing.

Class warfare is powerful, it won Obama the election. However, that simply divides us further. The so ...

........ I am willing to pay more in taxes. If my taxes went up, that would be fine.

nmemkha:YixilTesiphon: What the hell do you think banks do with the money you deposit? Shove it up their ass? Do you know what a mortgage is?

You're as clueless as he is. Mortgages haven't been not backed by deposits since the Savings & Loan debacle of the 80s. Banks invest deposits (keeping enough on-hand to meet Reserve requirements) and then invest the rest and reap the profits.

The money to fund loans is created out of thin air.

I think you're overlooking the "fractional" portion of fractional reserve banking. Giving money to the bank allows more lending. Its just not directly proportional.

Zeb Hesselgresser:Mach10: There has never been an economy anywhere at any time that has recovered or improved as a result of austerity.

Right-wingers can knee-jerk all they want about the cost of social assistance, but the reality has been borne out again and again. Put $20 into the pocket of a rich guy, and it goes right to the bank. Put $20 in the pocket of a working-class citizen, and it goes right into the cash register of your local store.

And as much as Chase Manhattan would love you to believe otherwise, it's the general store--not the bank--that forms the basis of a moving economy.

Which tree are you plucking those $20 bills off of?

How about from the 40 billion a month for quantitative easing? Right now that money is earmarked for buying distressed assets off the books of companies and for the most part, they just sit on the cash as there has been no appreciable uptick in job growth or demand for product, so no need to expand and hire new people. Perhaps at least some of that money could go to public works projects. Put people to work, inject money into the economy at the consumer level, and build infrastructure. I seem to recall an interstate bridge collapsing in MN a few years back. The aging infrastructure is still a real concern and needs to be addressed..

Mrbogey:nmemkha: YixilTesiphon: What the hell do you think banks do with the money you deposit? Shove it up their ass? Do you know what a mortgage is?

You're as clueless as he is. Mortgages haven't been not backed by deposits since the Savings & Loan debacle of the 80s. Banks invest deposits (keeping enough on-hand to meet Reserve requirements) and then invest the rest and reap the profits.

The money to fund loans is created out of thin air.

I think you're overlooking the "fractional" portion of fractional reserve banking. Giving money to the bank allows more lending. Its just not directly proportional.

Nothing was overlooked. The reserve ratios are nearly insignificant and mean little in today.